On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:47:09AM -0500, Phil Susi wrote: > First, sorry for the late reply; I seem to have fallen off the mailing > list some time ago. Also please take your misguided mail client's > reply-to-list function and drown it in the bathtub. Reply-to-all is the > correct way to reply to public discussions. Had you done this I still > would have seen this message long ago.
I don't see how you falling off the list is my problem, and this really isn't the place to discuss email etiquette. > > On 12/16/2015 5:52 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote: > > I took another look at this, and still disagree. do_mkpart throws > > exceptions in a couple of places based on results from the attempt to > > make the partition. There is also another use of partition_align_check > > So? > > > in do_align_check where it doesn't throw an exception. Moving these > > exceptions down into a function doesn't make sense. > > Hrm... it seems that if you want to get the reason in do_mkpart, you > would also want to get it in do_align_check. That is; this function > should also be printing the reason rather than passing NULL. Proper > exception practice still says the exception should be pushed down to > where the actual error is detected, but on the other hand, > do_align_check wants to just print the result rather than process it as > an exception and so it would have to catch it and work harder to print > it as a regular message instead of as an error due to the wonky nature > of libparted's makeshift C exceptions rather than having proper C++ or > SEH exception handling. > > Due to that and the fact that none of these functions are part of > libparted, I suppose the string argument is ok, but it seems that it > should also be added to do_align_check, don't you think? > I can't actually remember why I didn't do it that way in the first place so I'll extend the "not aligned" string to include the reason. -- Brian C. Lane | Anaconda Team | IRC: bcl #anaconda | Port Orchard, WA (PST8PDT)
